Big blind, AA, everyone all in 1st hand...
Quote: SOOPOOPeople have used a lot of neuronal activity for this. If I asked "after rolling 18 yo's in a row"..... Your answer would be couched in "this is impossible unless something fishy is going on". Same for the scenario presented here. If this is a real money tournament with real prizes and real people this just isn't going to happen!
I believe the OP was phrased as a hypothetical, wasn't it?
Either way, this is something that could at least conceivably happen. And, actually, something very close to this happens frequently in (particularly free) online games. It's a pretty far-fetched proposition, but not ridiculously so.
Besides, I learned something throughout the course of this discussion that I found interesting, which is that AA can fail to have the best probability to win the hand even without another AA being out, but the two other aces do need to be in other hands.
Quote: SOOPOOPeople have used a lot of neuronal activity for this. If I asked "after rolling 18 yo's in a row"..... Your answer would be couched in "this is impossible unless something fishy is going on". Same for the scenario presented here. If this is a real money tournament with real prizes and real people this just isn't going to happen!
I ain’t no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player don’t have fantastic hands, but they’re getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isn’t terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I don’t know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You don’t need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.
Quote: RSI ain’t no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player don’t have fantastic hands, but they’re getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isn’t terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I don’t know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You don’t need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.
We can agree to disagree. If I'm the 9th guy at a real tournament table and all 8 went all in on the first hand I'd be concerned things are not on the up and up. As far as Mission's comment about a non real money game, with nothing to win or lose, then, whatever you do is ok, OF COURSE>>>>>
It is a VERY bad decision to shove in 5th spot with a bad hand...... You don't know that we are playing some silly hypothetical that the net 4 guys will go all in also...
Quote: SOOPOOI think I like Gordon's response. Something fishy must be going on for the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th guys going all in.
This is sort of like the question of would you bet on a yo after 17 yo's in a row. The premise is so outlandish you can't rationally answer the question.
I'd say a better question to ask a more realistic question, like would you go in first hand of WSOP main event if two people shoved first hand and you have AA in big blind? A novice like me would call. Negreanu, Chan, Hellmuth instafold. They know over time they can beat most tables. I know over time I get beaten.
^^ I agree with the above. First, a majority of the players should/would fold in that scenario. Has anyone ever entered a tournament where 9 players went all in? I haven't.
Quote: SOOPOOWe can agree to disagree. If I'm the 9th guy at a real tournament table and all 8 went all in on the first hand I'd be concerned things are not on the up and up. As far as Mission's comment about a non real money game, with nothing to win or lose, then, whatever you do is ok, OF COURSE>>>>>
It is a VERY bad decision to shove in 5th spot with a bad hand...... You don't know that we are playing some silly hypothetical that the net 4 guys will go all in also...
I'm not sure what you mean by, "On the up and up."
If it's a tournament table being dealt by a casino, then my assumption might be the eight players (some or all) decided there might be an advantage in having one of the participating players move forward in the tournament with a deeper stack, and that, if that player cashed, the participants would all then split those winnings. Whether I was a part of that group or not, it wouldn't change the fact that I have aces in the hole.
To the last part, what's a bad hand in that scenario? If you believe that everybody else is playing high cards and you've got some low suited-connectors, then your hand actually becomes a decent hand. Let's look at the following scenario:
Hand 1: AcAd
Hand 2: KhKs
Hand 3: QdJd
Hand 4: KcQc
Hand 5: 5h6h
The probability of 5h6h to win that hand is 21.92% in that scenario and the only hand MORE likely to win is the aces. Even if you change KcQc to something like 9s8s, then the probability of 5h6h winning does drop below 20%, but it is still the second most likely hand to win, overall. Change it to 7c8c and the 5h6h is still the second most likely hand to win.
In the scenario above (the first one) shoving has a positive expected value, especially if there is an ante in this tournament. Even 5d6h is the second most likely hand to win, with a probability of 17.63%, if you change it to that.
Texas Hold 'Em is a weird game sometimes. If you change the order of the first four hands, I think you can very easily get into a scenario where every single player is justified in shoving, particularly if they are aggressive to begin with.
Quote: RSI ain’t no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player don’t have fantastic hands, but they’re getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isn’t terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I don’t know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You don’t need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.
I agree- you aren't a poker pro. I do play WSOP Circuit events as a hobby, and have been at quite a few tables where I was the only non-pro.
The logic you describe is perfect for why all 9 players at a table might limp into the same hand (call the blind bet). But all 9 players pushing all their chips in? No.
In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament.
In a WSOP tournament, I have indeed seen three people go all in on the same hand -the first person had QQ, the 2nd person had KK and the 3rd person had AA. But I have never seen more than three. The idea of 8-10 people going all-in on the same hand in a tournament is simply unrealistic. This thread is liking asking "if pigs could fly, could they fly at super-sonic speeds?"
This is correct. In the stated OP, $500 with 500 entries... its survival. I've been "on the bubble" in several online tournies with rockets, and its an early fold 100% of the time. Wait to be late. I've also seen the OP opening with all-ins early and mid... again, an easy fold at start of tourny. No one else knows your pocket is AA, right?!?!?!
Even if BB, most on-lines start 10-20-40, some 20-40-80. The "loss" of a BB compared to a freezeout loss. There's the risk. IMHO fold, and remain.
98
Quote: 98Clubsgordonm888: " In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament. "
This is correct. In the stated OP, $500 with 500 entries... its survival. I've been "on the bubble" in several online tournies with rockets, and its an early fold 100% of the time. Wait to be late. I've also seen the OP opening with all-ins early and mid... again, an easy fold at start of tourny. No one else knows your pocket is AA, right?!?!?!
Even if BB, most on-lines start 10-20-40, some 20-40-80. The "loss" of a BB compared to a freezeout loss. There's the risk. IMHO fold, and remain.
98
I still disagree, or think that it depends on the player. I think that the bigger stack gives me a better probability to eventually make it to the cash than folding does, even if I face a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament immediately.
I agree that being, "On the bubble," would make a difference, but being on the bubble and the very first hand of the entire tournament are two extremely different scenarios. If I'm, "On the bubble," then I would put my probability of making it to the cash at much higher than 22%, thereby making the fold pretty easy if the scenario is otherwise the same, or in similar scenarios. I seriously doubt that I fold aces if I catch somebody heads-up, or anything like that, but my fold range relative to the action certainly becomes more open.
In the OP, the presumed player HAD BETTER KNOW HIS OPPONENTS. At that price with 500 seats, one might expect to know quite a few, IF and only if that one's level of play. We do not know the level of play of the OP'er... take a chance against the big boys after a good win, or playing against like-opponents at the OP'ers level.
When seated against unknowns... el foldo. At best with a few known opponents, its a shove... at best.
98
Quote: gordonm888I agree- you aren't a poker pro. I do play WSOP Circuit events as a hobby, and have been at quite a few tables where I was the only non-pro.
The logic you describe is perfect for why all 9 players at a table might limp into the same hand (call the blind bet). But all 9 players pushing all their chips in? No.
In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament.
In a WSOP tournament, I have indeed seen three people go all in on the same hand -the first person had QQ, the 2nd person had KK and the 3rd person had AA. But I have never seen more than three. The idea of 8-10 people going all-in on the same hand in a tournament is simply unrealistic. This thread is liking asking "if pigs could fly, could they fly at super-sonic speeds?"
It's something that is extremely unlikely to occur, but there is a theoretical answer that is interesting. I guess it's more analogous to asking something like, "could a football team make a comeback down by 24 with 30 seconds left in the game?" We will probably never see it, but you can talk about how it would happen and what strats should be used.
I used to play small rebuy tourney's online. That's another area where this might happen. People would go crazy trying to build a stack in the rebuy period.
I guess that has also happened in WSOP rebuy events, where some players are willing to even make -ev plays in order to try building a stack because they value the bracelet more than cash ev.
After the first few all is, some players might call any two cards, hoping to either have a monster stack or just rebuy and be back where they started.
Quote: winningwizard$500 buy in tournament 500 people.....you table has 10 seats. very first hand of the tournament, you are big blind and you have AA....entire table is all you call or fold? its obvious call for me, but is there anyone out there that would fold?
With that many people going all in, I would assume all the Aces are in play and fold.
Depending on the situation you could assume for that many people to go all-in that would generally suggest that the aces are spread out in Ace King/ AQ suited hands. One can assume all the kings are out, one would assume all the Queens are out, someone probably has pocket pair of jacks, someone in late position might very well have 910 Suited and even pocket tens might be around there somewhere. Your biggest competition would be the 910 Suited. It's unlikely anyone other than the person with 9/10 Suitor just going to make a straight cuz all the high cards are out that would make somebody a straight. It be unlikely for anyone with queens, Kings, jacks 10's to make a set on you. If you start looking at the deck composition the aces might be as high as 50%+ to win the hand. With nine people going all-in and a 50% chance to win the hand that's good enough odds to take your chances.Quote: PokerKing666With that many people going all in, I would assume all the Aces are in play and fold.
Quote: gordonm888I agree- you aren't a poker pro. I do play WSOP Circuit events as a hobby, and have been at quite a few tables where I was the only non-pro.
The logic you describe is perfect for why all 9 players at a table might limp into the same hand (call the blind bet). But all 9 players pushing all their chips in? No.
In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament.
In a WSOP tournament, I have indeed seen three people go all in on the same hand -the first person had QQ, the 2nd person had KK and the 3rd person had AA. But I have never seen more than three. The idea of 8-10 people going all-in on the same hand in a tournament is simply unrealistic. This thread is liking asking "if pigs could fly, could they fly at super-sonic speeds?"
As has been stated numerous times in this thread, making a decision is at least partially based on the size of the tournament (# of players) as well as other conditions (rebuying allowed, how good you are, etc.). I think we've moved past only looking at the specific scenario in the OP in this discussion and it's branching out into other scenarios.
Yes, I know how tournament strategy works, I'm not retarded. But it'd be idiotic to use the same type of strategy for every type of tournament. No way in hell would I play a small winner-take-all tournament with 20-30 entries the same that I'd play in the WSOP ME. Things that would favor going all in are if it's a smaller tournament, you're a worse player, as well as outside influences but that doesn't really count (like if you are sort of "wasting" your time in the tournament).
Quote: RS
Yes, I know how tournament strategy works, I'm not retarded.
That's a half truth.
